''TIME'' - definitions.

S

socrat44

Guest
''TIME'' - definitions
==
Can ''Time'' exist without matter ?
No.
Therefore, the right definition of ''time'' is to say: ''Gravity-time''
We have Earth ''gravity-time''.
Another planets have their own ''gravity-time''
From ''gravity-time'' is possible to create another definitions of ''time''
( atomic time-clock , biological-time, local-time, psychological-time . . . . )
=====

D - TIME.jpg
 
How Long Are Years On Other Planets?

A year is defined as the time it takes a planet to complete one revolution of the Sun,
for Earth this is just over 365 days.
This is also known as the orbital period.
Unsurprisingly the the length of each planet’s year correlates with its distance
from the Sun as seen in the graph above.
The precise amount of time in Earth days it takes for each planet to complete its orbit can be seen below.

Mercury: 87.97 days (0.2 years)
Venus : 224.70 days (0.6 years)
Earth: 365.26 days(1 year)
Mars: 686.98 days(1.9 years)
Jupiter: 4,332.82 days (11.9 years)
Saturn: 10,755.70 days (29.5 years)
Uranus: 30,687.15 days (84 years)
Neptune: 60,190.03 days (164.8 years)

https://space-facts.com/orbital-periods-planets/
#
If someone is 30 years old on Earth, on Mercury will be 124 years and 45 days old.
If someone is 30 years old on Earth, on Venus will be 48 years and 157 days old.
If someone is 30 years old on Earth, on Mars will be 15 years and 635 days old.
=====
The ''gravity-time'' depends on masses and speed of planets
=========
 
wil said:
the time if rotation, the length of a day, doesn't change the nature of time itself.
Click to expand...

''Time'' doesn't have ''nature''.
Time is artificial / mathematical measurement between a beginning and an ending.
===
 
I agree. So on another planet they would just create another artificial version of time. But but there is time, there is the past there is now there is a future, unless you want to get all esoteric on me. How we identify this second to the next well obviously vary
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
wil said:
I agree. So on another planet they would just create another artificial version of time. But but there is time, there is the past there is now there is a future, unless you want to get all esoteric on me. How we identify this second to the next well obviously vary
Click to expand...
If one clock is in a car moving faster than another car, it will record less time passed than in the slower car, if you check both clocks against the elapsed time of say, one minute, measured by a third observer clock. They are making atomic clocks now that can actually measure the difference.

And if there are there are two clocks, one suspended half a metre above the other, they record different times. Essentially every line between every here and there in the universe, has its own clock with a different rate of time, as measured by a common observer clock. It's all in the video, lol ...
 
Last edited:
Sounds like going to and from Fiji. If you leave Los Angeles on Tuesday, Wednesday disappears somewhere over the Pacific and you touch down in Nadi on Thursday. Coming back is real interesting. You leave Nadi at 10PM and arrive in LA the same day, but in the morning before you left... o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Namaste Jesus said:
Sounds like going to and from Fiji.
Click to expand...
And every time you make that journey, you age at a different rate to the person born exactly at the same second as you, assuming they don't do as much travelling ... if they were in an aeroplane at the time, of course, that really throws a spanner in the works.
 
And I know that time passes quicker now that I'm 60, than it did when I was 6. The week starts, and I look round, and it's over. The atomic clocks might say different, but I know for a (subjective) fact they're wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Lol...if a clock moves faster how does that actually matter if we both are at lunch the same time day after day?

I love reality more than conjecture.
 
wil said:
Lol...if a clock moves faster how does that actually matter if we both are at lunch the same time day after day?

I love reality more than conjecture.
Click to expand...
But one of you is older, depending on where you've been since breakfast. And your head by lunch time has aged faster than your feet. So time is a natural perception necessary for us to operate as natural beings.

We see only visible light, a tiny fraction of the whole spectrum. We dont hear much. We cannot conceptualise in four-dimensional terms, our natural facilties aren't capable.

Mathematics can describe a black hole, where time and space are crushed out of existence, although our natural five senses perceptive facilities can't form a picture of it. But in fact timespace is moving and changing as suns and planets, galaxies move around, etc.

The mathematics breaks down at the infinity of a black hole. That's the limit of mathematics. That's the limit of science. That's the limit of human/natural perception. Time is the wall of the room/dimension of Nature in which we exist. But is there something outside?

EDIT: To a flea, the hair on the back of the dog it's on is a dense forest. That perception works fine for the flea?
 
Last edited:
Thomas said:
And I know that time passes quicker now that I'm 60, than it did when I was 6. The week starts, and I look round, and it's over. The atomic clocks might say different, but I know for a (subjective) fact they're wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean the 12 years it took to finish public school, that took forever. The decades that have passed since, a mere blink of an eye. Haven't a clue where that old codger came from that stares back at me from the mirror these days...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
OK — I'm reflecting on what Wil's saying, but I'm throwing this out there for correction ...

wil said:
I love reality more than conjecture.
Click to expand...
Is it not the case that what we perceive as 'reality' is actually our conjecture ...

wil said:
... does that actually matter if we both are at lunch the same time day after day?
Click to expand...
I think there are a number of different times going on here:
1: There is the 'clock time' by which we agree to meet for lunch.
2: There is my body time,
3: There is my subjective time,
Repeat 2 and 3 for you ...

And so at the lunch table we have five separate actualities, of which we are conscious of perhaps one or two, or if we're carried away, conscious of none of them.

Is this 'time' discussion a Newtonian v Quantum debate — not so much 'this' versus 'that', but that the two co-exist, although respond to different laws which appear to be determined, or become apparent by, scale?
 
I am not a scientist, I am not a theologian, I enjoy the banter but am more interested in the things that actually effect life on this planet and benefit us all in living on this planet.

Clocks may run backwards in another world, how dies that effect the refugee in Syria and my grandchildren?
 
The Aztecs had the wheel, but they just used it for childrens toys. No-one made the connection. Some guy watching steam lift a kettle lid caused the industrual revolution. Glass wasn't invented to make windows; someone thought: this stuff lets through light, so maybe if I put a bit of it here, in the wall ...
 
Last edited:
... and if there were no scientific discourse, there would not be so many things that effect life and benefit us all.

Whether $24billion for a bigger-n-better particle accelerator is value for money (if indeed the original CERN is), is another question.

Then again, when you look at national defence spending, it's a spit in the ocean.
 
Yes I am off and over simplistic in my response. I obviously love science oh, you miss radar Mark greatly, but arguing about the difference in time from my head to my feet oh, I I would just rather take a nap. I just think it's in this life we have bigger fish to fry . But since it's not all about me I'll get out of the way
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top